HAV has one of the highest concentration of knowledge on historical tank technology, and I wish to receive help in making this project "historically plausible" as much as possible. I hope that you might give your assistance in this designing.

As you can see, when comparing with a Patton, the Cheonho gun is set quite high. While putting it down to Patton's level (bottom 1/3) will be difficult due to how far back the turret is located, at least lowering the barrel position to half the height of the turret will improve things greatly.

4. Change commander periscope form (something similar to Leopard 1's)

5. Widen the mantlet/gun mount and install gun sight and coaxial MG into the mantlet

Example of how the original gun sight was installed. Actual measurements/locations will be calculated later.

I've basically made the engine smaller by 10 cm, resulting in the above changes. This gives the extra space to comfortably add in the transmission without having to deal with raising the engine deck or lengthening the hull. What I remembered was that Korea* had more advanced metallurgy than Germany, so a slightly slimmer engine is in the realm of possibility.

1. Turret traverse mechanics: I have no idea what kind of turret traverse mechanics there are. Any particular insight to this?

2. Commander cupola redesigning: Currently trying to decide how to fit in hunter-killer capabilities. So far it's pretty much a mix of Leopard 1 style cupola/periscope and Tiger style designation. Trying to see if I can get this developed further without cluttering up the commander's position like what happened with Conqueror.

Way too ahead of it's time for a Leopard 1 type model. Heavy armor would still be used in this time.

Plus you're taking parts of tanks that never existed at the time and saying the Japanese magically just put this together. .-.

Wikipedia

Leopard 1

The Leopard project started in November 1956 in order to develop a modern tank, the Standard-Panzer, to replace the Bundeswehr's American-built M47 and M48 Patton tanks, which, though just delivered to West Germany's recently reconstituted army, were rapidly becoming outdated.

I think that in 1946 or immediate post war there was some craze about auto loaders and oscillating turrets

or the design would call for more armour. I think in 1946 not many people might not have actually wanted a tank...

However, I think if they did want a tank, the hull would be averaged out to be suitable for the kind of stuff that happened when tanks got too close to heavy AT weapons. They also would have known that WWII AT weapons (german Infantry, Panzerfausts) could basically insta kill your tank 100m away

the turret armor is just, GOD THICK, its like AT proof, the turret armor is VERY IMBALANCED, are you trying to design a heavy tank?

HAV has one of the highest concentration of knowledge on historical tank technology, and I wish to receive help in making this project "historically plausible" as much as possible. I hope that you might give your assistance in this designing.

As you can see, when comparing with a Patton, the Cheonho gun is set quite high. While putting it down to Patton's level (bottom 1/3) will be difficult due to how far back the turret is located, at least lowering the barrel position to half the height of the turret will improve things greatly.

4. Change commander periscope form (something similar to Leopard 1's)

5. Widen the mantlet/gun mount and install gun sight and coaxial MG into the mantlet

Example of how the original gun sight was installed. Actual measurements/locations will be calculated later.

I've basically made the engine smaller by 10 cm, resulting in the above changes. This gives the extra space to comfortably add in the transmission without having to deal with raising the engine deck or lengthening the hull. What I remembered was that Korea* had more advanced metallurgy than Germany, so a slightly slimmer engine is in the realm of possibility.

I'm starting to think my Fictional (BK) 2A6 has more plausible armour, engine and the gun plans were and still are insane (for my tank anyway)...

ex: the amour is all around, therefore the sides and back are pretty well armored

the suspension lowers ground pressure even more than the Tiger II, the result is a wider, more stable tank with more space (I was trying to make it wider when I realized it wouldn't look good enough)

Shrinking an engine or its deck for that matter isn't the best Idea, I think you should make it flush with the hull

the mantelet on my tank is paper thin, at only 50 mm, it relies on turret armour and its extreme slant

In other words, keeping the Tank flush minimizes weak points in the armor and welding along with increase of production

Also, from what I understand the BMW 003 had poor reliability. Also, gas turbines of the time tended not to respond well to sudden throttle movements, a characteristic which is likely undesirable when powering an armored vehicle.

Also, from what I understand the BMW 003 had poor reliability. Also, gas turbines of the time tended not to respond well to sudden throttle movements, a characteristic which is likely undesirable when powering an armored vehicle.